The Political Fray - Political Forum
Go Back   Political Fray > The Political Fray > Current Events

Current Events Latest news, current events, and headlines from around the world


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old February 2nd, 2010, 09:19 AM   #1
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

US Missile Defense System in Gulf - war brewing with Iran?

Iran responded today to the US build up of missile systems in the Persian Gulf. The US has been speeding up its efforts over the last month by managing to get the cooperation of Bahrain, UAE, Kuwait and Qatar for basing the US Patriot defense missiles in the Gulf. Most of the countries in the Persian Gulf, including Saudi Arabia have been investing billions of dollars to build up their defences over the last two years. The reason for speeding up the US efforts over the last month is because the UN efforts to get Iran to stop making nuclear fuel have been unsuccessful. Obama also took a position in his State of the Union Address, warning Iran of consequences of continuing to produce nuclear fuel. So the US has been taking a strong position to the equivalent of rattling its sabres.

What do you think, is there a war about to happen with Iran?

Iran responded today by saying that the US is trying to sow division in the Gulf?
Quote:
Iran said Tuesday that the strengthening of U.S. missile defense systems in Gulf Arab countries is aimed at sowing regional divisions and that Tehran's neighbors should not be drawn into believing the country poses a threat.

U.S. military officials said over the weekend that the systems — involving upgraded Patriot missiles on land and more U.S. Navy ships capable of destroying missiles in flight — is intended to counter a potential Iranian missile strike.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad met Tuesday with the crown prince of Qatar, one of four Arab nations were the U.S. has based Patriot missile systems, and told him the West was seeking to divide them.
"Westerners do not want friendly relations between countries in the region. Their life is dependent on rifts and insecurity," the president told the visiting crown prince, Sheik Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani.

"The enemies intend to extend the fire of war in the entire region to solve their own political and economic problems," state TV quoted Ahmadinejad as saying in their meeting.

Ahmadinejad said Iran and Qatar should build closer links and develop a common understanding of what he called plots by enemies
deanhills is offline  
Old February 2nd, 2010, 09:32 AM   #2
Congressional Leader
 
DodgeFB's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Undisclosed
Posts: 2,751

I think Iran wants trouble and will keep on until they get it. Then there will be something else for the US haters to gripe about. But since they will be griping about something or other anyway, might as well be that.
DodgeFB is offline  
Old February 2nd, 2010, 10:42 AM   #3
Anarchist
 
Dirk's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
From: Disunited Queendom
Posts: 1,943

I don't like how the Obama Administration is antagonising Iran. Ahmadinejhad may be a veritable fount of rhetoric, but he's proven that Iran is approachable and open to negotiation - and that's the technique that's proven most effective. What do those blockheads in the White House think they're doing?
Dirk is offline  
Old February 2nd, 2010, 10:47 AM   #4
Congressional Leader
 
DodgeFB's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
From: Undisclosed
Posts: 2,751

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk View Post
I don't like how the Obama Administration is antagonising Iran. Ahmadinejhad may be a veritable fount of rhetoric, but he's proven that Iran is approachable and open to negotiation - and that's the technique that's proven most effective. What do those blockheads in the White House think they're doing?
Heck man, I don't know. I am just an old hick from Kentucky. But I hear we have "the education president" running things now. Supposed to be one of if not the smartest man to ever come our way.

Me I am just old school. I say shoot or shut up.
DodgeFB is offline  
Old February 3rd, 2010, 07:34 AM   #5
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

Quote:
Originally Posted by DodgeFB View Post
I think Iran wants trouble and will keep on until they get it.
I agree with you Dodge. Nothing like a common enemy and a "perceived threat" from outside, to motivate the Iranian demonstrators to focus away from demonstrations and unite them with anti-American memories.
deanhills is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 12:30 AM   #6
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

Looks as though Iran is defying the United States. Taking its own positiion in that it has the right to make as much nuclear fuel as it likes. Do you think this is maybe a correct position to take? Or do you think the world can interfere?
Quote:
Iran's president on Sunday ordered his atomic agency to significantly enrich the country's stockpile of uranium, angering Western nations who want to the Islamic republic to halt its nuclear program.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad maintained, however, that Iran was also still willing to follow a U.N. plan to export its uranium abroad for further enrichment. Refining uranium produces nuclear fuel for a power plant but if carried out far enough can create material for a weapon.
The mixed messages from Tehran have infuriated the U.S. and its European allies, who claim Iran is only stalling for time as it attempts to build a nuclear weapon. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates called for the international community to pressure Iran into abandoning its nuclear program.
Source: Yahoo!News 8-Feb-10
deanhills is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 11:03 AM   #7
GOP
Representative
 
GOP's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: United Kingdom
Posts: 360

I'd say the war between Israel and Iran are closer. The way the Ahmadinejad government has been threatening Israel over the past years is horrible. Israel has even been practicing on the attack on Iran (several times), I understand Israel and also if the United States went to war against Iran. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gets away with tampering with voting during elections, then you need other methods to get rid of him.
GOP is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 11:14 AM   #8
Anarchist
 
Dirk's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2009
From: Disunited Queendom
Posts: 1,943

They'll follow UN protocol. They love the UN (which isn't surprising, by the way). The Government - Iran has an extremely complex system - takes a very pragmatic international relations policy (with a ton of anti-West propaganda and rhetoric thrown in). A war with Israel would be the height of idiocy. Even more ridiculous once they have nukes.
Dirk is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 01:04 PM   #9
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

Quote:
Originally Posted by GOP View Post
I'd say the war between Israel and Iran are closer. The way the Ahmadinejad government has been threatening Israel over the past years is horrible. Israel has even been practicing on the attack on Iran (several times), I understand Israel and also if the United States went to war against Iran. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gets away with tampering with voting during elections, then you need other methods to get rid of him.
There has been a lot about this in the media, i.e. Israel being very concerned about Iran aiming nuclear missiles at Israel. Why Israel though and not the United States? I can't understand why Israel?
deanhills is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 01:19 PM   #10
Vice President
 
David's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
From: Opa Locka
Posts: 5,664

Quote:
Originally Posted by deanhills View Post
There has been a lot about this in the media, i.e. Israel being very concerned about Iran aiming nuclear missiles at Israel. Why Israel though and not the United States? I can't understand why Israel?
Not Israel even, they'll be pointed at whoever attacks them. What people need to realize is Iran doesn't want nukes to go all James Bond villain on everyone, they want nukes for MAD.
David is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 01:24 PM   #11
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Not Israel even, they'll be pointed at whoever attacks them. What people need to realize is Iran doesn't want nukes to go all James Bond villain on everyone, they want nukes for MAD.
Sorry, you've lost me here. What does MAD mean?
deanhills is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 01:27 PM   #12
Vice President
 
David's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
From: Opa Locka
Posts: 5,664

Quote:
Originally Posted by deanhills View Post
Sorry, you've lost me here. What does MAD mean?
Mutually Assured Destruction

Basically the idea is Nation A fired nukes at Nation B. Nation B is wiped out but before it's wiped out it shots it's own nukes in retaliation. Nation A is also wiped out. Thus nuclear war is pointless and nukes stay in their silos.
David is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 01:30 PM   #13
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
Mutually Assured Destruction

Basically the idea is Nation A fired nukes at Nation B. Nation B is wiped out but before it's wiped out it shots it's own nukes in retaliation. Nation A is also wiped out. Thus nuclear war is pointless and nukes stay in their silos.
So what is the point then? Would it not have been better for them not to have any nukes, or does Israel have missiles aimed at Iran?
deanhills is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 01:50 PM   #14
Vice President
 
David's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
From: Opa Locka
Posts: 5,664

Quote:
Originally Posted by deanhills View Post
So what is the point then? Would it not have been better for them not to have any nukes, or does Israel have missiles aimed at Iran?
Yes, via bombers.
David is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 05:33 PM   #15
Representative
 
dave's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Alaska
Posts: 131

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirk View Post
I don't like how the Obama Administration is antagonising Iran. Ahmadinejhad may be a veritable fount of rhetoric, but he's proven that Iran is approachable and open to negotiation - and that's the technique that's proven most effective. What do those blockheads in the White House think they're doing?
Obama antagonising Iran?

Do you mean the Obama that sided with the Iranian government over the Iranian people protesting and being shot in the streets?

The Obama that said he would meet with the Iranian government without preconditions?

The Obama that sent a holiday greeting to Iran in March (for the Persian New Year) saying he wanted a new relationship with Iran "that is honest and grounded in mutual respect", is that the Obama you think is causing the problems with Iran?

Iran has lead Obama on, playing for time while it pursues its nuclear weapons program, and now Obama (and France, and Germany, and the rest of the world) realize these open and friendly overtures are not working.

This is Iran antagonising the world. Take off your blinders.
dave is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 05:40 PM   #16
Representative
 
dave's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Alaska
Posts: 131

MAD only works if you act in a reasonable manner. It worked in the Cold War because neither the US nor the USSR were suicidal. Can you say Iran is not suicidal, a nation that openly talks about wiping Israel off the face of the earth, a nation whose government shoots its own citizens, a nation run by religous fanatics that don't think twice about suicide bombers?

MAD also only works if there is not a missile defense system. Israel started working on missile defense a long time ago, plus the US has missile defense systems in theater for this specific purpose.
dave is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 06:43 PM   #17
GOP
Representative
 
GOP's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
From: United Kingdom
Posts: 360

Quote:
Originally Posted by deanhills View Post
There has been a lot about this in the media, i.e. Israel being very concerned about Iran aiming nuclear missiles at Israel. Why Israel though and not the United States? I can't understand why Israel?
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad threatened to wipe Israel off of the world map back in October 2005, so it's quite understandable if you ask me.
Looks like the Western countries are finally understanding: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8504637.stm although it's far too late!
GOP is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 07:27 PM   #18
Vice President
 
David's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2009
From: Opa Locka
Posts: 5,664

Quote:
Originally Posted by dave View Post
MAD only works if you act in a reasonable manner. It worked in the Cold War because neither the US nor the USSR were suicidal. Can you say Iran is not suicidal, a nation that openly talks about wiping Israel off the face of the earth, a nation whose government shoots its own citizens, a nation run by religous fanatics that don't think twice about suicide bombers?

MAD also only works if there is not a missile defense system. Israel started working on missile defense a long time ago, plus the US has missile defense systems in theater for this specific purpose.
He said the Israeli gov't needed to be overthrown. How many times are you guys going to use the mistranslation? It used to be funny but it's getting old.

No Iran wouldn't use nukes and as for the shootings, every major power has done that, even the US. Hell the Feds have ordered an air strike on Americans before!
David is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 07:52 PM   #19
Representative
 
dave's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: Alaska
Posts: 131

Quote:
Originally Posted by David View Post
He said the Israeli gov't needed to be overthrown. How many times are you guys going to use the mistranslation? It used to be funny but it's getting old.

No Iran wouldn't use nukes and as for the shootings, every major power has done that, even the US. Hell the Feds have ordered an air strike on Americans before!
I did a little reading after your post, maybe you should research it a little further.

The Republic of Iran Broadcasting said that Ahmadinejad had demanded that "Israel must be wiped off the map". They explained that that means "cause a place to stop existing" or "obliterate totally", or "destroy completely".

As the controversy grew, the statements changed.

At best, tranlators said the statement in question should be translated as the regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time.

Given the controversy, Ahmadinajhad (and other Iranian diplomats) were asked repeatedly to clarify. Read their statements. They never come out and say, "No, we do not want Israel to be wiped off the face of the earth", they spin and dodge and try to weasel out of the question. All they have to say is, no, Israel has a righ to exist, but they can't even do that.
dave is offline  
Old February 8th, 2010, 08:40 PM   #20
Secretary of State
 
deanhills's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,187

Quote:
Originally Posted by dave View Post
Obama antagonising Iran?

Do you mean the Obama that sided with the Iranian government over the Iranian people protesting and being shot in the streets?

The Obama that said he would meet with the Iranian government without preconditions?

The Obama that sent a holiday greeting to Iran in March (for the Persian New Year) saying he wanted a new relationship with Iran "that is honest and grounded in mutual respect", is that the Obama you think is causing the problems with Iran?

Iran has lead Obama on, playing for time while it pursues its nuclear weapons program, and now Obama (and France, and Germany, and the rest of the world) realize these open and friendly overtures are not working.

This is Iran antagonising the world. Take off your blinders.
That was earlier on. Obama was very straight with Iran in his State of the Union Address:
Quote:
These diplomatic efforts have also strengthened our hand in dealing with those nations that insist on violating international agreements in pursuit of these weapons. That is why North Korea now faces increased isolation, and stronger sanctions – sanctions that are being vigorously enforced. That is why the international community is more united, and the Islamic Republic of Iran is more isolated. And as Iran's leaders continue to ignore their obligations, there should be no doubt: they, too, will face growing consequences.
deanhills is offline  
Reply

  Political Fray > The Political Fray > Current Events

Tags
brewing , defense , gulf , iran , missile , system , war



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Not Defense Spending? a777pilot Government and Politics 21 January 24th, 2013 06:45 AM
India looks to defense upgrades to help on China border myp Current Events 1 February 5th, 2012 07:39 PM
Iran threatens to take action if carrier moves to Gulf myp Current Events 5 January 4th, 2012 06:26 PM
Turkey backs Nato missile defence shield against Iran CatholicCrusader Current Events 1 September 4th, 2011 06:40 AM
Should the United States pursue an SDI missile defense system? myp Government and Politics 0 April 17th, 2010 05:29 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2009-2013 Political Fray. All rights reserved.